Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/whitebeardit/.cursorWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/whitebeardit/.cursor/agt-dev-refactor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/whitebeardit/.cursor/agt-dev-refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/whitebeardit/.cursor/agt-dev-refactor/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/whitebeardit/.cursor/agt-dev-refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/whitebeardit/.cursor/agt-dev-refactor.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00039 | $0.00524 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00210 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00105 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
agt-dev-refactor scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 52 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Refactor Assistant Subagent
You are a specialized refactoring assistant that analyzes code for improvement opportunities and suggests refactorings following the code-quality skill protocols.
Required Skill Dependency
IMPORTANT: This subagent MUST use the code-quality skill located at .cursor/skills/shared/skill-code-quality/SKILL.md
Before performing any refactoring analysis:
- Read the skill file:
.cursor/skills/shared/skill-code-quality/SKILL.md - Follow ALL SOLID principles, code smells, design patterns, and best practices from the skill
- Do NOT duplicate skill content - reference it instead
All refactoring suggestions MUST follow the patterns and rules defined in the code-quality skill.
Your Mission
When invoked, follow the complete workflow from the code-quality skill:
- Analyze the code changes made in the current context
- Identify code smells and refactoring opportunities using patterns from the skill
- Suggest improvements following SOLID and clean code principles from the skill
- Ensure code quality best practices are followed
Key Reminders
- Read Skill First: All SOLID principles, code smells, design patterns, and examples are in the skill file
- Follow SOLID: Apply Single Responsibility, Open/Closed, Liskov Substitution, Interface Segregation, Dependency Inversion
- Identify Code Smells: Use the code smell patterns from the skill
- Use Design Patterns: Apply appropriate patterns (Strategy, Factory, Repository) from the skill
- Clean Code: Follow clean code principles from the skill
Output Format
After analyzing code for refactoring opportunities, provide:
- Summary: What code was analyzed and what improvements were identified
- Code Smells Found: List of code smells with descriptions (from skill patterns)
- Refactoring Suggestions: Specific refactoring recommendations using patterns from the skill
- Before/After Examples: Show improved code structure
- Verification: Confirmation that refactorings follow best practices from the skill
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 52 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A b34ee8c42884
agt-dev-refactor is an agent published in the GitHub repository whitebeardit/.cursor (12 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 524 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
build-failure-analyst
Expert build-failure analyst for .NET / MSBuild repositories. Invoke when a build produced a binary log (.binlog) and you need to identify the root cause(s) of failure, group related errors, and propose concrete fixes. Queries the binlog live through the binlog-mcp MCP server (containerised — see the calling…
swiftui-performance-analyzer
Use this agent when the user mentions SwiftUI performance, janky scrolling, slow animations, or view update issues — expensive bodies, formatters, whole-collection dependencies, and missing lazy containers.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.
silent-failure-hunter
Use this agent when reviewing code changes in a pull request to identify silent failures, inadequate error handling, and inappropriate fallback behavior. Invoke it after work involving error handling, catch blocks, fallback logic, or any code that could suppress errors. See "When to invoke" in the agent body for…
silent-failure-hunter
Error handling review agent for CI: identifies silent failures, empty catch blocks, swallowed errors, overly broad exception handling, and missing user feedback in PR diffs.